Photoshop How To Use: rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 10 topics

rec.photo.digital
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en

rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: It's just wrong
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/06e32c9cd78fc6f1?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 9:07 am
From: Grimly Curmudgeon

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Paul Heslop
<paul.heslop@blueyonder.co.uk> saying something like:

>on trying to discover the artist etc I found this page, sure to raise
>some smutty comments ho ho but the theme seems to be quite common
>http://www.bronze-depot.com/catalog/category.asp?catid=3

Not a Mannikin Pis to be found.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Sharing Photos with Friends
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/f6d0b1d1a39fdba0?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 9:20 am
From: Boris

Boris <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in
news:h03g15$28p$1@news.eternal-september.org:

> Hi,
>
> This request may be impossible.
>
> My dad used to use the Comcast Photo Show to share his digital
> pictures with friends. He is completely pc/digital illiterate. He
> doesn't know how to use Windows explorer, let alone understand files
> and folders, but with the now discontinued Comcast Photo Show, he
> could insert his camera SD card into the reader slot on his pc, and
> the Photo Show application guided him through creating a slide show
> that he could then send to his friends.
>
> He doesn't even know how to reuse his SC cards. When he'd run out of
> space, he'd go out and buy another card. I've tried for over 10 years
> to show him the way around his pc, etc., but he refuses to learn.
>
> Is there any program that he can use to make slide shows, or at least
> that will let him insert his pictures (reduced size) in his Outlook
> Express? He runs XPHome.
>
> Thanks.

I'm thinking Picasa may be the best bet for my dad. I 'think' (not sure) I
can set it so that whenever a media card is inserted into the pc, Picasa
copies the pics on the card. I think I can show him how to place and hold
multiple pics in the Picasa photo tray, and then select Email.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Ford, The Survivor
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/6854901652467a29?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 9:40 am
From: Chris Malcolm

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Grimly Curmudgeon <grimly4REMOVE@removegmail.com> wrote:
> We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
> drugs began to take hold. I remember Savageduck
> <savageduck1{REMOVESPAM}@me.com> saying something like:

>>You noticed, he even mixed types.
>>He has Firestone cross-plies on the front and radials on the back.

> If you're going to mix types, the radial should be at the rear.

Doesn't it depend on whether the drive is front or rear?

--
Chris Malcolm

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 10:26 am
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-02 08:05:08 -0700, Grimly Curmudgeon
<grimly4REMOVE@REMOVEgmail.com> said:

> We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
> drugs began to take hold. I remember Savageduck
> <savageduck1{REMOVESPAM}@me.com> saying something like:
>
>> You noticed, he even mixed types.
>> He has Firestone cross-plies on the front and radials on the back.
>
> If you're going to mix types, the radial should be at the rear.

...and that is what was done on this Model A.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 10:28 am
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-02 09:40:20 -0700, Chris Malcolm <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> said:

> In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Grimly Curmudgeon
> <grimly4REMOVE@removegmail.com> wrote:
>> We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
>> drugs began to take hold. I remember Savageduck
>> <savageduck1{REMOVESPAM}@me.com> saying something like:
>
>>> You noticed, he even mixed types.
>>> He has Firestone cross-plies on the front and radials on the back.
>
>> If you're going to mix types, the radial should be at the rear.
>
> Doesn't it depend on whether the drive is front or rear?

There is a front wheel drive Model A???

--
Regards,

Savageduck

==============================================================================
TOPIC: grim news for photographers tourism and rights
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/f739094ebddaa70e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 9:43 am
From: tony cooper

On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 09:38:36 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

>In article <mm7a25p2bntgdqomhikqo4ofe6t8m60mrv@4ax.com>, tony cooper
><tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> >> but you are overlooking all of the
>> >> other reasons that could be the basis of hauling his sorry ass off to
>> >> jail: obstructing a police officer, disturbing the peace, or whatever
>> >> laws there are on the Seattle or Washington state books that could
>> >> pertain. All legal charges.
>> >
>> >according to the police report he was arrested for refusal to provide
>> >id.
>>
>> >there is *nothing* in the police report that says he obstructed
>> >the police in their duties, disturbed the peace or anything else.
>>
>> This is intriguing! Becker has not been given access to the police
>> report of an incident in which he was the participant, but *you* have
>> seen the police report. How'd you manage that?
>
>i'm just good, i guess.
>
><http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattle911/library/SKMBT_60009051317560.pdf>
>
>> The word "credibility" comes to mind. And, the term "blowing smoke".
>
>as far as credibility and blowing smoke goes, which one of us is
>supplying references and which one isn't?

I supply links to anything that I feel needs secondary confirmation.
I don't supply links to statements of personal opinion.

Link, cites, are useful if they pertain to what is being discussed.
When you supply a link to site that does not answer the question, you
don't get points.

>> >> I admit to being completely ignorant of Washington state law.
>> >
>> >yet despite your admitted ignorance, you insist that becker was in the
>> >wrong and should have been arrested.
>>
>> No, I have never insisted that he should have been arrested. Not even
>> close.
>
>it sounded like you were happy they 'hauled his sorry ass off to jail.'

I wasn't happy, but I wasn't particularly distressed, either. This
incident started with a refusal to respond to a Loomis employee. It
escalated to a confrontation with the REI security people. Then the
cops were called because Becker said "you'll have to arrest (me) to
get (his) ID". So, Becker put himself in the position of requiring
arrest. He seemingly wanted to be arrested.

He had choices. He didn't do anything particularly heroic. It wasn't
a Rosa Parks breakthrough for freedom. It doesn't seem he was out to
prove a point. He got involved in a situation that escalated and
chose not to quit digging.

I really don't see that the police had much choice. You can't expect
the police to back down when the situation had progressed through two
levels. They were dealing with an unknown and unable to determine
anything about the individual. They couldn't check for wants and
warrants by running his name. They had no reason to suspect Becker of
anything, but they had no way to verify that Becker should be let go.

As far as Becker being in the wrong, it depends on what Becker wanted
to accomplish. If he wanted not to be hassled, he had the option of
defusing the situation with the Loomis guard or the REI security
people. (I do recognize that the Loomis guard might not have been
receptive to that) If he wanted to make a point about his rights, he
was right in digging in because that resulted in what he wanted. I
seriously doubt if he had this in mind at the beginning.

My negative view of Becker is mostly based on his web page and his
reportage. He seems to see himself as Patrick Henry or as someone who
has achieved fame for standing up to the man. He brags about his
"hits", his interviews, and the media attention. He's probably
keeping his phone line open for a call from "60 Minutes" or "The Today
Show".

As to the photo angle, I would probably take that shot myself. This
is not a "photographer's rights", thing though. It was the subsequent
actions, not the photograph, that made this a story. It would be a
photographer's right story if Loomis or the maker of the ATM machine
attempted to suppress the photo, if a charge would have been brought
specifically for taking the photo, or if someone would have deleted
the photo from Becker's phone against his wishes.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 9:46 am
From: tony cooper

On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 09:38:36 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

>> This is intriguing! Becker has not been given access to the police
>> report of an incident in which he was the participant, but *you* have
>> seen the police report. How'd you manage that?
>
>i'm just good, i guess.
>
><http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattle911/library/SKMBT_60009051317560.pdf>
>

Interesting point in that report. Becker was carrying a fake ID with
someone else's photograph on it. He claims he found it. Wouldn't
that be a red flag to the police?

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 9:52 am
From: C J Campbell

On 2009-06-01 05:22:56 -0700, ChelseaTractorMan
<mr.c.tractor@hotmail.co.uk> said:

> On Sun, 31 May 2009 18:16:04 -0700, C J Campbell
> <christophercampbellremovethis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> I don't see that the photographer did anything wrong, but he was
>>> intrusive. I don't think the parents were wrong to be alarmed.
>>
>> As far as I can tell, Tony, you seem to think that photographers have
>> no rights at all. Your extreme views do not argue well for your
>> credibility.
>
> what rights should owning a camera bring?

Freedom of artistic expression. Freedom of the press. Freedom of
speech. The right not to be bullied by pointy-headed busybodies,
subjected to unreasonable harassment or the unreasonable fears of
others, the right not to be defamed or libeled by others, subjected to
false arrest, unlawfully imprisoned, or your equipment unlawfully
confiscated or destroyed.

Owning a camera does not bring rights that you do not already have, but
owning a camera does not remove those rights, either. Photographers
have the same basic human rights that everybody else has.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 9:56 am
From: C J Campbell

On 2009-05-31 23:14:53 -0700, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> said:

>>
>
> The thing is, having a right does not mean that one should use it as an
> excuse to behave discourteously. When enough people do that then
> legislators attempt to legislate courtesy and that is always a very bad
> thing for freedom.
>
> The clods who keep shouting "I've got a right" ultimately going to lose
> that right for _everybody_.

The photographer did not behave discourteously. He was treated discourteously.

No right was ever preserved by not exercising it lest it offend
somebody else. Rosa Parks did not fight for equality by sitting in the
back of the bus. Gandhi did not gain the independence of India by
showing his travel papers to whomever demanded to see them. Thomas
Paine did not help gain the independence of America by obeying British
laws restricting freedom of the press.

Running like mice and hiding in our holes only encourages the assholes.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 9:58 am
From: Leonard

On 2009-06-02 07:55:02 -0700, "whisky-dave" <whisky-dave@final.front.ear> said:

>
> "Chris H" <chris@phaedsys.org> wrote in message
> news:i3V+LwWlPAJKFANX@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <t0u725dmrt05bu44k05nn4okhqgec3s75h@4ax.com>,
>> ChelseaTractorMan <mr.c.tractor@hotmail.co.uk> writes
>>> On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 15:27:15 +0100, Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> There are wrongs on both sides. Why do photographers think they have a
>>>>> moral right to photograph people?
>>>>
>>>> Because the law says they can.
>>>
>>> does that make it morally right?
>>
>> The law is an absolute.
>>
>> Morals are not. And Yes it is *MORALLY* right.. God told me so :-)
>
> Which God is that, is that the one true and only God. :-D
>
>
> I wonder what happens with CCTV pictures of kids.
> Do parents worry over some perve watching.

I guess that is the god of the "Church of the Gooey Death!"

== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 10:02 am
From: C J Campbell

On 2009-05-19 02:28:26 -0700, chrisj.doran@proemail.co.uk said:

> On 15 May, 21:20, "nigel" <ni...@NOThereoday.com> wrote:
>> http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=856968
>>
>> As far as this article and the international press goes it does'nt seem to
>> appear that he did anything wrong.
>
> The case was thrown out:
> http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Greek_photographer_Tube_photo_case_thrown_out_news_282766.html

But
>
> a disturbing link at the bottom of that article mention some
> Austrian photographers being forced to delete all their photos, and
> another that London Underground may now require amateur photographers
> to buy permits when previously this applied only to professionals.
>
> Chris

It should not end there. The policeman should be prosecuted for false
arrest, the father sued for harassment and libel and arrested for
public harassment and disturbing the peace, and the police sued for
harassment and false imprisonment. Until this happens, bullies will
continue to indulge in this behavior. There have to be consequences in
order to make them stop.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 11:00 am
From: tony cooper

On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 00:55:22 -0800, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

>Why do you find it necessary to make snide remarks,
>gratuitous personal insults, and use inflamatory
>insulting adjectives to describe other people?

That's really kind of funny coming from the person most likely to call
someone else "ignorant" and the most frequent user of that insulting
term.

One could almost assume that there was a funny bone, and not stick,
stuck in you somewhere. But not quite.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How to hold and carry a camera with a heavy lens
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/35d5d71e3cce87b4?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 9:45 am
From: C J Campbell

On 2009-05-29 07:36:21 -0700, aniramca@gmail.com said:

> I am wondering what is the best way to carry around a camera in a hand
> strap with heavy and large lenses (glass lenses 200-300mm up)
> I felt uncomfortable to let the camera with a heavy lens hang on its
> strap while walking around. Do most people handle the lens just at the
> lens mount area to support the camera and lens while walking? If you
> just let it hangs on the strap, the strap can also break. Was it just
> recently a major camera brand name provided a notice about their
> defective camera hand strap?
> Another related question is whether there are any cases that with a
> lot of usage, the camera-lens mount buckle/bend under the pressures?
> I assume that most DSLR bodies are made of steel around the lens
> mount. Are cheaper DSLRs (non pro type) more prone to this failure, as
> perhaps the lens mount on the camera body was not designed to carry
> for heavy lenses? Or is the camera body usually over-designed and this
> would never be a problem at all.
> Thanks for info and discussion.

Most camera manufacturers say that you should not allow a camera body
to support the weight of a large lens. You will generally find this in
the information that comes with the lens. A 200-300mm lens is
borderline, depending on how fast it is. The camera-lens mount can and
will bend or buckle if the lens is heavy enough. At the very least, the
mount can be distorted enough that the lens will no longer fit tightly,
weakening electrical contacts and allowing it to move slightly inside
the mount.

My heaviest lens is a 400mm f/2.8 VR, which I sometimes use with a
teleconverter. There is no way that anyone should allow the camera body
to support the weight of this lens. Such a lens comes with its own
strap and tripod mount. If you want to know where the borderline is,
listen to other people when you bring out the lens. If they say "Damn!"
it is too heavy to be supported by the camera.

If I want to use the 400mm handheld, I let the lens strap hang around
my neck loosely while I carry the camera and lens by the tripod mount,
which is shaped like a handle. I do not tighten the mounting ring, but
leave the lens to rotate freely inside the ring. When shooting, I bring
the body firmly against my face, supporting the lens with my left hand
under the focus ring. I leave the tripod mount above the lens, out of
the way of my hands. My right hand operates the camera controls.

However, I use the lens this way only in the event no other support is
available. That is extremely rare. Even if I do not have my Bushmaster
shoulder mount, or a tripod or monopod, I can nearly always find some
support where I can rest the lens -- fence rail, tree, post, large
rock, or whatever. Nevertheless, you should practice continually using
every method for supporting your big lens. It requires muscles you do
not otherwise use very often. Besides, the last thing you want is to be
fumbling with the lens trying to figure out how to hold it while that
fox is stalking a mouse.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Newbie needs a flickr tutorial
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/f78d56775465c467?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 10:00 am
From: Chris Malcolm

AKT <akt@null.void> wrote:
> I am computer savvy, even camera savvy, but not savvy with flickr or
> such sharing sites. Recently I participated in a group tour. The
> organization wants me to help people post and share their pictures at
> flickr. So I need a plan and tutorial quickly.

> The organization already has an account at flickr. Photos for previous
> events are already posted there. Ideally, we want to open an area just
> for our event, inside it a page for each participant where he can
> upload his photos with captions.

To upload to flickr you must be a member of flickr -- which is easily
done and free at the basic facility level. You ought to check if
there's a daily limit on number uploaded on the free accounts. Perhaps
what you should do is buy a professional account for the group, and
then give everyone the login name and password. But there is then the
risk that any of them can do anything to any of the uploaded
photographs. Depends on how grown up your tour members are, and
whether any of them are somewhat clumsy -- "oops! I didn't mean to
cancel the whole account and delete everyone's pictures! I was just
trying to log off!"

> Then we could tell each participant to
> navigate to their own page and upload the pictures. (I think it would
> be better to organize by people rather than attractions but that's a
> separate issue.)

> So I need a quick tutorial on how to accomplish this. I went to flickr
> site and saw words like collection and set. I couldn't figure out the
> difference; does one fit inside the other or are they conceptually very
> different things?

Sets hold only photographs. Collections hold only sets or
collections. But both only belong to a specific Flickr member and
nobody else can upload to them.

The usual way of doing this kind of thing on Flickr is for the
individuals to each have their own personal Flickr account, where they
upload their own photographs. You create a public group for the whole
group, which you as administrator restrict in membership to people you
invite or permit. You invite or permit all the group members. Then
they and only they can submit photographs to that group, but nobody
can do anything nasty to anyone esle's photographs. You can choose
whether the photographs are visible only to group members, only to
group members plus extra non-Flickr people you name, or anyone on
Flickr, or anyone.

--
Chris Malcolm

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 10:45 am
From: AKT

Chris Malcolm <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

: But there is then the risk that any of them can do anything to
: any of the uploaded photographs. Depends on how grown up your
: tour members are, and whether any of them are somewhat
: clumsy -- "oops! I didn't mean to cancel the whole account and
: delete everyone's pictures! I was just trying to log off!"

Yes this is a risk I discussed with our organization. Members are
highly educated and computer savvy, just not savvy about photo sharing.
So they just give out login and password, nothing bad has happened so
far, but it is a concern.

: The usual way of doing this kind of thing on Flickr is for the
: individuals to each have their own personal Flickr account, where they
: upload their own photographs. You create a public group for the whole
: group, which you as administrator restrict in membership to people you
: invite or permit. You invite or permit all the group members. Then
: they and only they can submit photographs to that group, but nobody
: can do anything nasty to anyone esle's photographs...

This is certainly better. Question:

If we create a public group, then do people need to have a separate
individual fickr account before they can join the group? Or, joining
the group creates an account for them within the group?

Each group member gets a "collection" inside the group and is limited
to uploading to or deleting from his own collection?

Finally, as this will mean starting from scratch, is flickr the best
place for such things or would some other free site be better?

Thanks.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: CF dying?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/2d949e57f899e814?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 10:33 am
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-02 05:10:00 -0700, Jørn Dahl-Stamnes
<newsmanDELETE@REMOVEdahl-stamnes.net> said:

> Alfred Molon wrote:
>
>> In article <7a586cf4-fd90-4dc9-93d7-9f2457015b84
>> @q16g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>, Poldie says...
>>
>>> My 4gb CF card holds less than 400 raw (10MB or so 10megapixel)
>>> files. Saying 2GB is plenty is laughable. My card cost £20 including
>>> postage.
>>
>> 400 images on one card is a lot. Even more than that is dangerous, in
>> case the card goes bad.
>
> And how many times as a card gone bad? ... compared to all those pictures
> you was not able to take because you had to change a filled up card?
>
> Over the last 5 years I have take over 100000 pictures and never ever have a
> card failed.
>
> The only advantage in smaller cards (ie. 4 Gb cs 16 Gb) is that the smaller
> one is a bit faster.

Agreed.
I use CF exclusively, having CF cards ranging from 128MB to 8GB with no
failures.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 10:38 am
From: Alfred Molon

In article <MY3Vl.36726$OO7.23004@text.news.virginmedia.com>, David J
Taylor says...

> I don't do RAW, so I have a little more margin. <G>

You should if you are serious about photography.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 10:39 am
From: Alfred Molon

In article <CX3Vl.36725$OO7.22065@text.news.virginmedia.com>, David J
Taylor says...

> It's nice if you can, but you don't necessarily want to have to take a
> computer round with you for a short trip, if a camera alone will suffice.

Actually I never travel without a computer. It's a Lenovo X200, light
and portable. If I do not shoot any photos I use it to check my emails.

Given that there are cheap and light netbooks (which accept huge HDDs) I
see no reason why anybody would not want to carry a small computer when
travelling. And a photographer might want to review the photos in the
evening.

> How many times in recent year have you had a good name brand CF or SD card
> go bad on you?

In 2003 a CF card got corrupted, loss of the data (partial recovery with
a utility possible). Later the pins of the CF slot of a card reader got
bent and it was no longer possible to insert CF cards into it.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 10:38 am
From: Alfred Molon

In article <4i2a25drual1ub8isc3o38kp11ke5858q2@4ax.com>, Gary Edstrom
says...

> That means that I can only store about 207 CR2 files on a DVD. I guess
> it's about time to invest in a BlueRay drive!

That is the solution, but Bluray media are still ridicolously expensive.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 10:39 am
From: Alfred Molon

In article <4a251699@news.broadpark.no>, Jørn Dahl-Stamnes says...

> And how many times as a card gone bad? ... compared to all those pictures
> you was not able to take because you had to change a filled up card?

Happened once to me.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Could you actually see photos made from RAW files?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c04187075ef6f9c5?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 10:39 am
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-02 04:56:20 -0700, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> said:

> In article <4a24ece5@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, Bob Larter
> <bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Nifty! I haven't installed CS4 yet, but that feature alone might make it
>> worth the upgrade.
>
> it works in cs3 too.

That is provided you have opened the ACR adjusted RAW file in CS 3/4 as
a "Smart Object."

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 12:18 am
From: Chris H

In message <87r5y3o0dq.fld@apaflo.com>, Floyd L. Davidson
<floyd@apaflo.com> writes
>Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> wrote:
>>In message <87skikgpt1.fld@apaflo.com>, Floyd L. Davidson
>><floyd@apaflo.com> writes
>>>If there are so many of them, why is it that neither of you
>>>can produce a shred of evidence?
>>>
>>
>>I have the Libris Britania CD of 630 MB of Public Domain and
>>Shareware software.
>>
>>From the read me of the Public Domain & Shareware Library Ltd CD....
>>Yes a CD pr
>>PUBLIC DOMAIN software and I note it is American
>
>So we see that you actually are exceedingly confused.
>
>The _shareware_ on that CD is copyrighted. The Public
>Domain software is not.

Well at the risk of getting tedious I can start posting the licenses for
the Public domain software on the CD

>The CD is itself a compilation
>and is itself copyright protected.

No it is the individual pieces of software.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 10:49 am
From: nospam

In article <200906021039208930-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck
<savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> >> Nifty! I haven't installed CS4 yet, but that feature alone might make it
> >> worth the upgrade.
> >
> > it works in cs3 too.
>
> That is provided you have opened the ACR adjusted RAW file in CS 3/4 as
> a "Smart Object."

right, and i explained how earlier in the thread.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Anyone remembers those old soft and hard camera cases?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/323e68ef10ad5b0f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 10:43 am
From: zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS)

In article <Xns9C1AB69EA1501VeebleFetzer@216.250.184.7>, Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote:
>In
>news:c8540cc5-8b4f-4e9a-b9a5-de04797878a5@s21g2000vbb.googlegroups.com
>aniramca@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> In the old film cameras era, I recall that when you purchase an SLR
>> camera, it usually comes with a soft or a hard (leather) case. The
>> case is attached to the camera via a screw to the tripod mount at the
>> bottom of the camera. I wonder why they do not have any more of this
>> type of camera case?
>
>Because they don't come at no cost.
>
>But, I've never used any that ever came with any camera I've owned.
>

If your using the camera, you don't want the case.

There would be the case of perhaps climbing where you don't want
the camera getting bumped around. Then you have to undo the case while
your hanging from a cliff.

greg

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The Ultimate Photo-Bag
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/d379eb3ce3f36aff?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Jun 2 2009 10:21 am
From: Wolfgang Weisselberg

["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems.]
Garrison K <gk@another.net> wrote:

> Yet, every operating system that I know sorts by numeric YYYY MM DD c.e. as
> default.

You mean "File browser". Not operating system. As an 'ls -f'
will teach you in a hurry.[1]

And not even *every* file browser sorts per default by file
name[2], though most of them do.

-Wolfgang

[1] -f means "unsorted".
[2] Proof: Create one that doesn't. It's very easy to create a
trivial file browser. Doing it well, that's another story.

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.photo.digital"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.photo.digital+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

Photoshop How To Use

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 10 topics - digest

0 comments:

Live Traffic

Photoshop How To Use

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 10 topics - digest

0 comments:

Search

Live Traffic